tiers

The curse for taking the grand final away from the MCG. Let the AFL learn. Never again no matter what.

Time to form the Maroons political party and stand for council elections to toss out the greens. Then get rid of the obnoxious rating system. Since when does a junior sporting club have to prove their value to the community. The best role for the council would be to produce a set of guidelines so that Kev and his mates can share the grounds in the area eg. stipulate when the grounds are reserved for the official organised sporting clubs who one would expect to assist in maintaining the grounds and when the ovals are free for others to use subject to a fair and transparent booking system. This would not cater for the ad hoc games that appeal to Kev but would be a start. In any event, when I was young we were happy to play footy on any level grassy ground using school bags or jumpers for goals. More strength to Joan and the team at Fitzroy FC.

Goal kicking is a skill that can be taught and practiced. The components of where to start the run in, how to hold the ball, how to run in, how to drop the ball and how to kick tghe ball can all be taught but does not require constant repetitions. It requires only a proper mindset and an easy, regular and readily repeatable process that follows the player's own rules. I believe that the major impediment to better goal kicking is the now formalised 30 sec rule that ostensibly allows players to get their heart rate down (a la LLoyd) and to set up but also allows for all the doubts and bad habits to intervene. The best goal kickers from days gone by (Lockett, Dunstall, Ablett, Hudson) did not need 30 sec. They were ready to kick as soon as they were in position and had a simple, regular process. Get the basics right and goals will follow.

I was at his first game v. Melbourne in the first round of 1963 at the Junction Oval. The combination of his young age (17), his athleticism and his spring had previously not been seen - he was a genuine one off footballer. To top it off (pun intended) he had a shock of long blonde hair that made him recognisable anywhere. On the day he seemed to dominate the game and yet his team mate Alan Morrow, a short c.185cm ruckman, was judged BOG for a stunning 22 mark game. But all we saw was Ditterich jumping ever higher above the packs.

The umpire went up to Petracca as he prepared to kick after the siren and from the grandstand it seemed as if he was reminded him that any deviation from a straight line would mean a call of "play on". This in fact happened when Petracca moved slightly off the line and the umpires arms went into the air as if calling "play on". A Franklin deviation is one thing, a player adjusting his run up but still kicking over the mark from some distance (where the angles are not improved) should not be penalised. Imagine if this happened after the siren in a close final (heaven forbid a grand final) and the result was overturned. There would be a riot on the ground. The umpires had better clarify this interpretation or the game will suffer. Over to you Gil.

The new manning the mark rule is currently having little effect because the umpires, to their and their coaches credit, are calling play on very quickly so that as soon a the player with the ball moves an inch, or even thinks about it, they call play on. The umpires have also been lenient with the "stand" rule and some teams are now not manning the mark behind the mark where sideways movement does not count. In the end my guess is that, for the reasons above, it will not change footy much but I am always nervous about a trigger happy umpire who awards a 50m penalty with little justification or contrary to what has become accepted practice. As they say it could cost a grand final for some over technical penalty not arising from a contest. One of the most perfect features of our footy is that frees have been awarded from the contest, not from technicalities as is common in most other sports eg offside.

AS stated above Kevin Murray did not play full back. He was too good and too valuable to leave down the back. Mostly half back and on ball. Verdun Howell was belatedly awarded his Brownlow after the VFL/AFL decided to abolish countbacks. On the night Howell came second. Interestingly a few back pockets have won when playing in the back pocket meant something. Bernie Smith of Geelong and John James of Carlton (who played bp that year) and perhaps Brad Hardie of Footscray who played in a number of roles.

Why is there an emphasis on money? Maxie is a champion who either makes a positive contribution or not. The money is irrelevant. I believe he makes a positive contribution and, with some more insight and planning from our coaching department, he could be even more valuable to us, not necessarily by picking up hitouts but by playing a role that maximises his strengths (strategic positioning, contested marking) and allows him to avoid being weighed down by roles that others could play adequately. Maxie is more than a typical ruckman - he could be a change the role.

Centre bounces/throw ups do not favour any ruckman and, as we have seen, clearances don't necessarily follow ruck dominance in the centre. Ball ups at stoppages are also becoming irrelevant as the crowding is too great to allow clean clearances. Boundary throw ins are different. If, and when, S Hocking directs the boundary umpires (now that there are 4) to throw the ball in quickly with a low, fast throw (instead of the slow, high loopy throws seen on the weekend) before a crowd forms then a dominant, extra tall ruckman serviced by smart on-ballers can prevail and add value to the team. However, the maximum value to be gained from Maxie is for him to take contested marks around the ground either to frustrate the opposition in our defence, to provide a get out from the backline and to hold the ball in our forward line. To this end we must train to allow Maxie full freedom to contest without interference from team mates. One out or even one against two means that Maxie can win the ball. It's all in the coaching and game plan.

His ability to take contested marks even when he appears to be out of position is remarkable. His kicking to position is excellent. Watch how he finds a target and how often he delivers to the spot. Very rarely beaten one out at ground level. Good pick up. PS No hope for Brownlow because history tells us that only one fullback (Fred Goldsmith, South Melbourne) has ever won. Although based on Saturday's form there must eventually be a Brownlow winner who dominates through his ability to win one on one contests and does not just accumulate possessions.

Offensive to Robbie. There will only ever be one Robbie in all of footy histoy. No one that I have seen in over 60 years comes close in skill and outright ability in a body that was not made for footy. Even more so that Robbie, unlike all the others, played in a poor team whereas the others named all played in powerful, successful teams that won premierships. They each had plenty of support where Robbie had almost none. As for Petracca, the others named could regularly win matches almost on their own a stength that Petracca, although dominant at times, has yet to master. When it comes, then we can talk about comparisons.

Decision to be made by club doctors to avoid exploitation. I can just see club doctors being encouraged to decide on whether or not an injury, no matter how it was acquired, would impact not only on this game but also on the next and subsequent games. The introduction of this rule is laughable. It will be rorted and gamed without end because no one will be prepared to challenge the doctors "clinical judgement". I posted earlier on how gaming and rorting can be reduced. I stick to my prescription over the AFL's invitation to cheat.

According to a news report, the sub rule will apply to more than concussion injuries but until detailed rules of operation are released, it will almost certainly be a system open to rorting. Let's wait and see..

Having been at the GF in 1964 my mind is starting to falter. You are correct - it should be 56 years still = zero.

Where is Picket Fence when we need him. Photos are great for the pr department but we need analysis of their movement.

No exceptions for next season. Too easy to game. Let's not find "outs". If this is to work it must be tough and strict or it will be gamed. If the substitute player cannot play the next match, for any reason, then the team does not get a substitute. Simple. Tough. Fair. Just. Equal. Sensible.

So knowing why doesn't alter the stats. 66 years still = zero.

If it is to be introduced it must be simple to administer and verify. It should apply to all types of contact injuries that have occurred in the game ie. not soft tissue type injuries that will take a player permanently out of the game in any of the first three quarters. No last quarter substitutions to be allowed. One quarter with a reduced bench should be considered normal. Substitute player is restricted to playing in the last quarter only to prevent coaches gaming the system ie. must be on the bench during the first three quarters and only join the 22 at 3qt. The injured subbed player must not be allowed to play the next match (not next week because could be gamed by the bye or finals). The 23rd is a to be real substitute ie. capable of playing a whole game and not a player recovering from injury who needs limited time. Substitute players must be selected in the 22 for the next match and no substitute player can be a substitute more than 2 times a season. The same strict liability approach that applies to man on the mark breaches should apply to any coach who transgresses who should be substituted for at least 2 games ie not on the bench, on the ground or in the box. No defences accepted. Seems fair and restricts opportunities to game the system. I commend it to the AFL

Opinion vs fact. I'll stick with facts. 66 years = zero.

The only stat that matters is premierships.

My most abiding memory of training during the 1987 finals (we attended all Thursday sessions) was the joy and excitement amongst the fans and the camraderie and confidence of the players. And then we had huge winds against north and south. It was a great time to be a demon.

Read the whole post. Tracca was not a lesser known player. We always knew he was good but needed time to mature, to find consistency and to build a team around him that would allow him to shine.

In 1988 we won three tough finals in a row to get to the grannie and then we played the dorks at the peak of their zoning induced form (in the day it was joked that they could play their seconds and still be good in the days before salary caps, drafts and limits on squad numbers). In 2000 we only had to beat beat a cocky blues (on the back of one of David Schwarz's greatest games, especially the last quarter) and then a weakened roos to go up against a team that had lost only one game for the year. Both opponents were dominant in those 2 years and we stood no realistic chance. As to which team would win, any demon squad with Schwarz and Neitz would have to be respected but the 1988 team had too many out and out demon champions like Lyon, Wilson, Johnson, Viney, Stynes, Wight and Healy even though it was not enough for a flag. I went to both grannies and I declare a diplomatic draw. Proud of all of them.

I have long advocated for TMac to play the traditional wing role - up and down the ground assisting defence, offering a leading target out of defence and holding the ball in forward. He has the motor, size and the skills for this "energizer bunny" role on one side of the ground and he is taller and stronger than most likely opponents. Until the FD coaches for this role then it will not work. Like all planned mismatches it needs to be thought out and trained into the team. And will take time to bear fruit but when it does, if it does, it will be worth the effort. Let's see if there is any vision in the FD.

It strikes me that over many years there have been no examples of lesser known players having both a break out game and then progressing at that higher standard. Weideman had such a game against Geelong in the finals but, notwithstanding a bad run of injuries, does not appear to have maintained that form. Others like Brayshaw, Spargo and ANB exhibit good passages in flashes but do not maintain that form either within a match or over several matches. Those that are identified early like Oliver and Petracca reach a high level of performance quickly but never surge above that level although that level is maintained. There seems to be a "class ceiling" that hovers above our team. Better coaching and development is the only answer. Let's hope the addition of Yze and Williams injects the required coaching expertise.